I have watched this show every year from the start and it has had good years and bad, good judges and bad, good acts and bad, but every year there is at least one element or act I like, to make me watch.

This year, I literally can't find one single good thing about it. Don't watch i hear you say, I really wish i didn't, but I have an 8 year old daughter than loves it and it is a family programme we watch every week. (there aren't many nowdays!)

1) The acts - every year I have been excited to hear what at least one act is going to do every week, not because they are a joke act, but because they are good, Not this year, even the amusement of Honey G wore out on week 2. The acts are totally average with average voices and no real image.

2) Song choices - literally every song has been done numerous times on this show and most of the songs are so old fashioned. Simon keeps telling the acts that this is a platform for them, but how are they to build up a fanbase singing old Michael Jackson songs (Rocking Robin - Gifty!)

3) Ruining the acts - People like Gifty and Emily had strong images when they started, but every week, Simon is stripping the image and credibility of these acts and turning them into generic pop singers rather than artists. Has Simon learnt nothing, apart from One Direction, anyone that was a generic pop act has failed after the show, but artists like James Arthur, Ella Henderson, Rebecca Ferguson, Olly Murs (started off with his pork pie hat and ska style music which made him successful, now turning into a generic pop star) etc etc. Someone like Matt Terry who has a good voice and a good image, has now spent 3 weeks singing cheesy old school songs. What niche are they trying to carve out for him. Emily has lost the guitar and artist rawness and is being prepped to sing a John Lewis Advert.

We saw quirky Kitty do the Bjork song a few years ago, we saw Andrea so an amazing version of Earth Song a few years ago - why bring it back so soon and not do it as well.

They are giving songs that are way to big for the acts and then wondering why they are being voted out.

Relly C has a good voice, but doesn't connect with any of the songs at all and that is why people didn't vote for her. Why the judges don't give this critique, I don't know. Also, take away the backing track in the sing off and turns out her voice wasn't as good as we thought it was.

4) The Judges- Where do I start. Why does Simon think that 3 judges between 55-65 will be aware of what the kids that download music will want to buy. The song choices are so old fashioned it is appalling. I am 48 and I don't want to hear the songs they are singing every week. Nicola is the best of a bad bunch, but her choices at JH were terrible and so far she isn't doing a great job with her acts.

When she was in it in the James Arthur year, she worked with him, didn't destroy his image, picked relevant songs and helped change them up to be appropriate to him as an artist whilst not trying to ruin the original song. Why did Nicole think that Ryan with his totally average voice would be able to carry off an Adele Song - she said it was like when JA did Hometown Glory - it was nothing like that at all, James Arthur could sing!

The whole drunk act by Sharon, forgetting her acts names and where they come from, Simon trying to confuse her and make a fool of her, the constant "Is it me next" when the judges are supposed to give their "nailed it" critique, is just embarrassing.

Simon is just totally beige now, doesn't say anything mean or funny and is totally pointless. Why people think Louis was missed last year I will never know, he isn't even really arguing or annoying the other judges as before, so what is the point of him and his appalling taste in music is just too much.

The critiques they give the acts - they literally say nothing if use whatsoever. Nicole gives the ocassional bit of constructive criticism about their voices, but then Simon slags her off for it or tells her that she is deaf. When Gary Barlow, Tulisa and Nicole were on the panel, they actually said something sensible and helped the artists, now it is rambling claptrap, Louis is literally on repeat!

4)The themes - Diva week and then having Michael Jackson and ice Tea - what is that all about? The total embarrassment of pretending that the jukebox randomly picked the Halloween theme - do they think we are stupid. The old fashioned nature of the themes is just so bad. I want to hear the artists sing the kind of songs I will buy when they finish the show, not a 80's Michael jackson song!

5) The backing tracks and constant choirs on the songs - the backing tracks are so loud sometimes, you can hardly hear the singers - it is a singing competition after all.

I could go on and on, this year is just so bad in absolutely every way. Please someone, tell me something that is good about this year. Even Dermot's dancing isn't as good!
End of rant!

Hard to argue with most of this.

The song choices stink of Cowell. He loves Whitney, MJ, Mariah & boybands and totally fails to move with the times.

He is turning the show into a sub-standard amateurish variation of Glee. Only slim/skinny attractive kids with mediocre voices get to the lives while the best singers are just 'used' to fill up the early episodes giving the pubic the impression that they have found talent this year. They are then cast aside at JH so that Cowell and the producers can have an easy ride on the manipulation front throughout the lives.

While I agree with quite a lot of that, I'm still enjoying the show!

I don't really agree with point 3. I thought the whole point of what they did with Emily this week was to move her away from generic pop to credible artist.

Personally, I would have preferred generic pop as I really disliked the arrangement but to call it generic seems a bit odd in her case.

Matt's probably my favourite right now so I don't think he's being ruined either.

For point 4, I think that Simon, at least, has a strong idea of what appeals to the market, regardless of his age. It's his job to do so and he does it very well. I'm not so sure of the other two, though. I approved of Nicole's choices at JH. It was Louis and Sharon who I thought got it totally wrong.

I really hope that Cowell and his chronies are not going to be involved with The Voice.

What i meant about Emily is that she was kind of cool, not over dressed, guitar slung over her shoulder, a kind of female Ed Sheeran type. Now she is glammed up, wearing short dresses and for the last 2 weeks singing slowed down versions of songs, standing on a box. They have stripped the artist out of her for the past few weeks,

In regard to Matt, from what he has sung so far, where do you see him fitting in the music scene at the moment? What kind of songs? The winner from two years ago, Ben Haenow, was really good all the way through the auditions, then Cowell got hold of him and before you know it, he was singing "I will always love you" probably with a choir!

Ben v's Matt
Good looking - yes
Good voice - yes
Nice bloke - yes
Back story - yes
Success after the show - no!

I am not sure Simon knows what to do with young singers unless they have quite a strong personality and can't be forced in to something they don;t want or can write their own songs.

Cowell hasn't a clue of anything outside of pop music.

Surely, slowing down well know up-tempo songs is precisely to emphasize the artistry and emotive quality of Emily's singing rather than just appealing to the pop crowd who prefer catchy but largely meaningless lyrics. Standing on a box puts the focus on the performance instead of the choreography or background chaos that surrounds other acts. I still don't understand how that doesn't indicate an effort to bring out the artist and individuality over the pop.

As for Matt, I found the songs suited him really well and propelled him to being one of my favourites but, in any case, the show is often about themes and some themes work better than others for different contestants.

The show gives you a platform but, a true artist, will be able to use that platform to build a career, whether they win or not. Plenty of them have sunk without a trace after winning and plenty of them have gone on to incredible success after coming second or third but that's down to them and what they do with the opportunity.

The X-Factor viewers aren't necessarily the same demographic as the people who will be buying their records later so it behooves the mentors to appeal to the viewers to keep their acts in as long as possible in order to build their profile and exposure. Once they leave the show, they can appeal to the record-buying masses more exclusively but, if they sink without a trace in the early weeks because that appeal doesn't suit the average X-Factor viewer then where does that leave them?

I agree, slowing down the track etc, does show artistry rather than pop, but just not her artistry. That is not what she was as an artist at all when she first started, but she is young enough for her to be pushed in to the direction that they want rather than she wants. Again I agree, standing on a box is better to dancing around, but it doesn't always have to be on spot lit box, they do it all the time. I liked Gifty's staging on Saturday, not as obvious as the old perspex box.

I think years ago they used to get a mixed audience who wouldn't necessarily buy the records after, but now with only 5.5m viewers, I think it is a lot of the audience who would download the music if the acts are good, hence why the winners single is often the most successful record the acts sell!

Fair enough but your original point that I was disagreeing with was when you said Simon was " turning them into generic pop singers rather than artists."

While Simon might have misread where her artistry lies (and I certainly wasn't keen on the direction he took her) I don't think it's right to say he was trying to turn her into a 'generic pop artist'!

I agree and disagree. Emily's song this week wasn't a generic pop song but her image was generic and far removed from her own style and while there is nothing wrong with making her more glam, it is moving her away from the act they saw and enjoyed through boot camp, so in her instance I meant more about her image and use of the guitar than the song she was singing. I also feel he went down the exact same route with Louisa last year as well, lots of slowed down uptempo songs, spot light on a perspex box, so maybe I meant more of a generic X factor star than a pop star. He did that about 3 or 4 times last year with Louisa. I think he is trying to follow what he considers a winning formula to win the show rather than listening and understanding the artist.

In regard to Gifty, she had a really strong image and fiesty personality and i definitely thought this week was good as she identified with the song, but what the hell was last week - Rocking Robin. They took a strong, confident artist who did a great first week performance and put her in a gold boob tube singing the cheesiest song in history. I can't believe that there wasn't a motown song that would have suited a strong, fiesty woman who has got great stage presence.

No point listening to and understanding the artist if it means the public don't connect with her and she gets kicked off early. Winning is the best way to guarantee maximum exposure and a record deal so, surely, a formula for winning the show is the better formula!

In some cases, understanding an artist may mean aiming her at a niche genre with very little widespread appeal. So is it really best to encourage that when he knows she'll just disappear into obscurity if they went that route?

Whatever he did for Louisa it connected with the viewers, she won the show and now she's in the charts. Is that really a bad thing?


Gifty, hasn't really wowed me much on any week, to be honest. I can take her or leave her.

I personally don't agree with going down the winning route and ignoring the artist. The whole point of the show is to give artists a platform to success in the future. If Emily totally changes her image for the show, then goes back to jeans and a guitar after the show and writes her own songs that are a total different style to the show, then it is a wasted opportunity to market an artist for 10 weeks.

I think they should nurture the artist and so you can watch them develop in front of your eyes into the artist they want to be. Everyone loved Emily all through auditions, boot camp and JH, doing her own thing.

There are some contestants that don't really have a style, like Louisa who was a young girl with a great voice, then it is easier to mould them into a pop star. Louisa also did really well with her first single cos it was a collaboration with a band that had an existing fan base, plus it was a good song. She will do well for the first album but then disappear into obscurity I think, featuring on other people's singles. She hasn't really carved out a niche or have an image, apart from pretty girl. I hope I'm wrong, but to have longevity, you need more than a good voice and a pretty face IMO.

The ones that generally succeed long term on this show, write their own material (1D aside) and have am image and are real and true to themselves.

So no-one in 24 hours can list the good things about the show - says it all really!

I love the show. Always have, always will. I enjoy the performances, I enjoy having a bit of agency in deciding the result. I enjoy the sense of competition, the highs when my favourite gets through and, of course, the ecstacy if they happen to win.

I love that it gives young (or old) talent a platform to achieve success they'd never have had otherwise and the charts are full of evidence to show that this show works on that level.

I agree with a lot of the points you made in the first post but I don't really care. As long as I'm enjoying it, I'm happy

I agree with all the above as well. Just feel that every year, the reasons for enjoying get less and less, with this year being the worst by far.

Glad you are enjoying it though.